About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
CSPAN 3
CNN 1
CNNW 1
CSPAN2 1
FBC 1
LANGUAGE
English 14
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)
less agree with the democratic controlled senate in harry reid. politically, finding the consensus to do it, there is an acceptance around the capital that if an agreement is going to be reached, it will have to be like the fiscal cliff deal was, like the transportation bill was. speaker boehner has to pass it with a lot of democratic votes. that is a politically risky thing to do. in the crisis will lead him to do it. getting a majority of republicans to vote for a deal that can also be agreed to with 60 votes in the senate, there is no way to do it right now. host: todd zwillich is a reporter on capitol hill. lesley clark spends much of her time at the white house for mcclatchy newspapers. we will focus on sequestration and we will break it down topic by topic. later in the week, we will look housing and education issues. we hope you tune in all week as we provide more specific details on what will happen and how it could potentially impact you. let me go back to bob woodward. it is one of the opinion pages driving the day. he says the president and jack lew have this wrong. thes
to harry reid. bill: that is cab fare, by the way. steve hayes, senior writer, "weekly standard." fox news contributor. good morning to you. >> good morning bill. >> president is on the road. no meetings to talk about this between senate leaders and house leaders. no meetings with the administration. friday there is no session on the schedule for congress. >> right. what's different about this one is that in the past, the fiscal cliff, these other things you at least staff to staff contact and negotiations and ongoing discussions, sort of largely out of public view. that even is not happening in this scenario. i think we're likely to see the sequester come march first and see how it plays out the next month. bill: if it comes, this deadline is little different from what we've seen in the past, steve. >> right. bill: this is gradual. make it works its way into the system a little bit at a time during the month of march. for sure during april. >> right. bill: it seems to have a different feel. there is not the urgency there. >> it does. this is where the white house is having, creating some
eternal. the president can sit down with harry reid tonight and work with senate democrats who have the majority in the senate to move a bill. it's time for them to act. i've made this clear for months now. and yet we've seen nothing. >> now, he wants them, senator, to move legislation that passed in the last congress. the last congress is irrelevant right now. you need new legislation in order to pass a bill. >> wolf, what's not irrelevant is last congress we had the tax increase. so now it's spending cut time. the president doesn't want to to the spending cut. we had the tax increase -- >> right now, to avert this fiscal crisis we have right now, these forced spending cuts, you need a new bill. you can't use a bill from the old congress. >> the president -- you know what, and i think scott walker, the wisconsin governor, said it, let the president come out and say, here's where we're going to cut $85 billion in spending. the bottom line is the president doesn't want to cut spending. it's $16 trillion in debt. he doesn't want to cut spending. >> he does want to cut spending but he
are applied. harry reid and other democrats, however, respond to that. i think this can be done responsibly. whether it is domestic spending or defense. what the president does have in his advantage here is republicans are somewhat divided in this. i think it is important for the republican caucus to stick together on this. dagen: what about that i am a conspirators sometimes, what if the economy continues to chug along at the casting, then it kind of points to the fact that more cuts should have been. you can say i am an idiot. >> i think the administration is concerned because their base does not want to see this. they have political concerns. i do not think they are practical and the terms of the government's ability to move forward and provide services and so forth. they are more worried about the political out, i think. connell: lower gdp estimates, or is there at least some individual companies that will be affected? >> the spending that obama has wanted, he has gotten. spending has increased. what do we have to show for it? the slowest economic recovery in three generations. dagen: s
reid yesterday filed a motion to limit debate and force vote on the hagel nomination. harry reid said today, though, that republicans are mounting a full-scale filibuster of the hagel nomination. he said that there's never been a filibuster of a secretary of defense in the country's history. discussion on the nomination continues. senator leahy on the senate floor now and that is live on c-span2. also coming up live on booktv.org later today at 7:00 p.m. eastern, stephen hess who wrote "whatever happened to the washington reporters: 1978-2012." he interviewed journalist who is were covered the federal government and washington and 30 years later talked to 283 of those to find out where things went on in their career and the fields they covered. that discussion with stephen hess gets under way at 7:00 and that's at booktv.org. >> we have a habit in this country, if i may say, now of glossing over presidents. we decided, some people, that they're balancedying -- bald eagles and they have to be treated as symbols of the country. what that means, though, is you have -- you have a smoothin
, chris, something that stood out to me is the backbone of harry reid. had he perhaps more of a backbone during these filibuster negotiations, and filibuster reform, perhaps he wouldn't be sitting here having this discussion anyway, and some of the fault, maybe a large portion of the fault lay with harry reid for us even having this discussion this morning? >> well, in fairness, look, both sides have threatened to do something about the filibuster and both sides are reluctant to do it, because quite frankly, they know the once that were in the majority now know at some point they'll be in the minority and vice versa and you know, there is some deference made to some rules of the senate and one of the things they all say if we'd stop the filibuster we'd become just like the house and i promise you on in congress on capitol hill that's not a compliment. >> is there any merit to what democrats are saying about the g.o.p. blocking this and putting the country at risk 'cause it's such an important security post? >> no, i mean, for one thing, the senate democrats said well, we're not going to
have barack obama who is a democrat, president of the united states. then we have harry reid who is the majority leader. so the democrats are in control of both. now, if you think back at what happened back in -- during the last bush administration, we had exactly the reverse. george bush was president of the united states and the democrats were a minority. same situation. so what happened? first of all, we had bolton come up, john bolton. same thing, subjected to a 60-vote margin. we had steve -- dirk kempthorne. all remember dirk kempthorne. there are a lot of people who did not approve of him. he was appointed by bush, a republican, and then when he came over here, the democrats didn't like him, they subjected him to a 60-vote margin. that wasn't a filibuster. this isn't a filibuster today. people are trying to say that and blame me as being the bad guy that's causing a filibuster. it's not the case at all. any more than it was the case back in the 2005-2006 and other times when we had a nominee that was put forth by president bush. it was objected to by the democrats. now, di
. the reason why it was defeated because the majority leader harry reid switched his vote to no so he could bring the vote back up again after the senate comes back from recease. a lot of republican senators were saying that they did not want this choice filibustered. even if they wanted to vote no on his nomination he at least deserves an up down vote in order to be approved. the republicans decided to use this vote as a way to extract more information from the white house on issues like the attack in benghazi so they passed hagel when they come back. the way you're looking at it, to me, it is efforts to delaying the inevitable. chuck hagel will be confirmed as the secretary of defense. he just has to wait a couple of days. you're going to confirm himny way and it is just another delay in what the senate is trying to to do. host: harry reid set a new vote in 11 days. what do republicans want to see in the meantime? guest: well, they say they would like answers, again, from the white house, more details about what the president did and did not do in the terrorist attack in libya. the white
and for gun rights has been strong on both sides of the aisle including with senate majority leader harry reid, the top democrat in the senate. so, you know, again the key is going to be given some of the events over the last year and this push from the white house, will the president be able to convince senators like reid, like mark pryor from arkansas, like mary landrieu from louisiana, et cetera, to go along with the kinds of gun regulations they have not supported in the past and then once that happens, can he create pressure among house republicans? again i think where he might be able to get something done is with an expanded type of background check, banning assault weapons, i just see as a nonstarter completely. jon: david drucker from "roll call". david, good to have you on. thank you. >> thanks a lot. jenna: the pakistani girl who survived being shot in the head by the taliban is speaking clearly and has now released her own video statement. the brave teenager's message to the world, a show of resilience for you this monday next. >>> also last night's battle between the ravens and 49
wallace on sunday morning. this was the president's idea. he approached harry reid with the idea. >> and they agreed to it. bill: house spub republicans voted twice to avoid and eventually capitulated. a lot of fingerprints. hang on alan. >> they vote the two to one for this. bill: in one second. in the end you're right about that. this is november of 2011 when the president suggested that any effort to veto or any effort to continue with these cuts would ultimately be vetoed by him. not my words, his. roll this. >> already some in congress are trying to undo these automatic spending cuts. my message to them is simple. no. i will veto any effort to get rid of those automatic spending cuts, domestic and defense spending. there will be no easy offramps on this one. bill: no easy offramps, tucker. forget about if the cuts come his way. no. how do we square that with what is happening now. >> i will say alan is right, that the republicans agreed to this. they didn't think it would come to this. this is again, a brilliant negotiating ploy on the part of the president, unfortunately i
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)